Bowles v. Palmer
61 N.E. 971, 180 Mass. 169, 1901 Mass. LEXIS 755
Opinion
The statute requires a copy of the declaration to be furnished on demand in all cases where there is an attachment and the declaration is not inserted in the writ. St. [170]*1701894, c. 405. The comma after the word “ particulars ” raises no reasonable doubt that the following words, “ when necessary ” qualify “ bill of particulars ” alone.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Bowles v. Palmer, 61 N.E. 971, 180 Mass. 169, 1901 Mass. LEXIS 755 (Mass. 1901).
61 N.E. 971 (Bowles v. Palmer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Big D Carpets, Inc. v. Welch Group, Inc.
639 N.E.2d 1085 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1994)
Ferguson & Co. v. Melillo
266 Mass. 197 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1929)